I think users would be crazy to trust such a bad thing because what appends :- Users are locked ( I cannot import my files in other apps )- Users are locked on this particular raw developpement software ( one of the big plus of RAW is that you convert files with one or another software, depending the strenght of each particular raw converter.- Users will lose their work if Apple cancel support of Aperture ( probable scenario : the new Adobe Lightroom kill Apertur sales, Apple kills Aperture )- What about file corruption.. and backups ?

Did i already said.. EVIL !

Use standard formats and never allow software (or hardware..) companies to lock your work in a closed black box.

First when you import and then process a RAW you can always very easily select the photos you want to export and it will export them in many different formats automatically taking into account all the changes that you have made ('export version'). So I could shoot a big pano in RAW and import it into Aperture and then after making my white balance adjustment etc just select the pano components and export them as either TIFF 8 or 16, PSD, Jpeg. Then they can be worked on in APP.

And yes all of the photos are contained in one "file" but in reality that's not quite true. OS X stores a whole directory structure within this "file" which can easily be accessed with the 'show package contents' menu choice. And from the UNIX command line it is a directory structure. So in a pinch your RAW files are all nestled in there.

I've been using it for a week now with my 5D which I've owned for the same week. I've been happy - organizing photos is a snap.

jayelwin wrote:And yes all of the photos are contained in one "file" but in reality that's not quite true. OS X stores a whole directory structure within this "file" which can easily be accessed with the 'show package contents' menu choice. And from the UNIX command line it is a directory structure. So in a pinch your RAW files are all nestled in there.

The metadata is indeed stored in XML files along with the raw files. This also included ratings and keywords. The "description" of adjustments is there as well, but since the "secret sauce" of image processing is not known, you only know what was applied, but not really how. Hope this makes some sense...

I don't know if Autopano will be XGrid aware, even if a network render mode is already envisaged for another declinason of the product. ... Use standard formats and never allow software (or hardware..) companies to lock your work in a closed black box.

Thanks for your input on Aperture. Have tried it a couple of days and have to say that I am finding it faaaaaar too slow on my 2GB 1,67Ghz PowerBook.

Would just like to renew my wish for a XGrid savvy version of Autopano. I cannot help but think that the creation of panos is what this technology was made to do.

Aperture runs pretty well on my 2.5 gHz Dual G5, but I can still detect a lot of slowness sometimes. I heard it relies heavily on the GPU, I have one that does not support the 30 inch so it's a little outdated. They HAD to make it run on powerbooks since that is what people use in the field, but with a single slower G4 and absence of the real powerhouse GPU I'd expect it to be a real snail. When you see what it can do ont he fly you can really see why it can get bogged down. All in all I've been pretty happy.

jayelwin wrote:Aperture runs pretty well on my 2.5 gHz Dual G5, but I can still detect a lot of slowness sometimes. I heard it relies heavily on the GPU, I have one that does not support the 30 inch so it's a little outdated. They HAD to make it run on powerbooks since that is what people use in the field, but with a single slower G4 and absence of the real powerhouse GPU I'd expect it to be a real snail. When you see what it can do ont he fly you can really see why it can get bogged down. All in all I've been pretty happy.

Well, a Powerbook being my only machine, I am sorry to say that I have to retire Aperture after a few test runs and go back to iPhoto in addition to basic Finder handling of images.